Russia again targeted grain facilities in Odesa in overnight attacks.
Emergency workers on Thursday at the site of a for war, of the conduct of the war, of the corruption at the core of Putin’s regime that I have heard from a Russian or a non-Russian,” Mr. Burns said.
Mr. Burns confirmed that the United States had some notice that the uprising might take place. He predicted that Mr. Putin would try to separate the Wagner forces from Mr. Prigozhin to preserve the combat prowess of the mercenary group, which has been important to Russia’s war effort.
Since the rebellion, and the deal that ended it, Mr. Prigozhin has been in Minsk in Belarus, but has also spent time in Russia, Mr. Burns said.
He said he would be surprised if Mr. Prigozhin ultimately “escapes further retribution.”
“What we are seeing is a very complicated dance between Prigozhin and Putin,” Mr. Burns said. “I think Putin is someone who generally thinks revenge is a dish best served cold, so he is going to try to settle the situation to the extent he can.”
Mr. Burns, a former U.S. ambassador to Russia who served in Moscow as the Russian president consolidated power nearly two decades ago, added that the Russian leader is “the ultimate apostle of payback.”
And, Mr. Burns suggested, it would not just be Mr. Prigozhin who faces repercussions.
U.S. officials have said privately that a senior Russian general, Sergei V. Surovikin, had advance knowledge of Mr. Prigozhin’s plans and may have supported the rebellion.
Asked if General Surovikin was free or detained, Mr. Burns said, “I don’t think he enjoys a lot of freedom right now.”
— Julian E. Barnes and David E. Sanger Reporting from Aspen, Colo.
Disruption of Ukraine’s grain exports could worsen hunger in some countries, experts say.
Image
Credit…Diego Ibarra Sanchez for The New York TimesRussia’s disruption of Ukraine’s grain exports exacerbates hunger in some countries facing shortages, though as long as grain prices remain relatively stable, the crisis is unlikely to become catastrophic in the short term, aid officials said on Thursday.
Moscow this week terminated a deal under which Ukraine, one of the world’s major grain producers, was able to export its food crops in the face of an effective blockade of its ports by Russia’s Black Sea Fleet.
For a year, the agreement had helped to stabilize grain prices and to ease a global food shortage. But the deal’s end has already caused grain prices to rise again and there is little doubt it will continue to create instability in grain markets and supply, aid officials said.
“This is something which is going to further disrupt markets,” said Arif Husain, the chief economist of the United Nations’ World Food Program. “That is what is troublesome.” He said it would compound problems for countries whose economies are still recovering from the coronavirus pandemic.
Grain prices rose sharply on Wednesday, but not to the high levels seen at the start of Russia’s full-scale invasion nearly 17 months ago. Mr. Husain said that even if grain prices did not soar, countries in the Middle East and Africa would have to pay increased shipping costs from grains sourced from farther afield than Ukraine, and shipping times would also increase.
Still, there are other countries producing grain and the flow of Ukrainian grain is not the only factor affecting prices. Others include climate and harvests in other countries, including Brazil and Russia, said David Laborde, the director of the Agrifood Economics division at the U.N.’s Food and Agriculture Organization. Brazil exported more than twice the amount of corn than Ukraine under the deal, he added, and Russia’s wheat harvest last year was strong.
“We have other countries in the world that are ready to sell,” said Dr. Laborde.
Arnaud Petit, executive director of the International Grain Council, an intergovernmental body, said that, while the week’s events would “add some pressure on the markets,” prices would not likely return to the levels seen 17 months ago.
Shashwat Saraf, the International Rescue Committee’s East Africa regional emergency director, said the halt to Ukrainian grain exports via the Black Sea hit some countries harder than others because they were already facing a serious problem with hunger. He pointed to Somalia and South Sudan in East Africa as examples, saying nearly 50 million people in the region were “extremely food insecure.”
He said the disruptions were “an aggravating factor which would increase vulnerability” for people who had already lost their livelihoods, had been forced to flee their homes and who were, in some cases, already dependent on aid assistance.
The list of countries likely to be affected also includes Afghanistan, Yemen, the Central African Republic, Liberia and Haiti, according to data from the U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization.
Gaya Gupta contributed reporting.
Advertisement
SKIP ADVERTISEMENT
Despite grain deal collapse, Putin and Erdogan are still relying on each other.
Image
President Recep Tayyip Erdogan of Turkey and President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia in Moscow in 2020. Mr. Erdogan said his country would keep up diplomatic efforts to get Mr. Putin to return to the deal.Credit…Mikhail Svetlov/Getty ImagesSince Russia invaded Ukraine, President Recep Tayyip Erdogan of Turkey has stood apart from his NATO allies, keeping cozy relations with President Vladimir V. Putin, making demands of his Western allies and using wartime diplomacy to raise his own stature.
Now the Kremlin has undercut him, pulling out of a grain deal that Mr. Erdogan helped broker, helping to raise his international stature and stabilize global food prices. The Russian withdrawal came just days after the Turkish leader met warmly with President Biden and said Ukraine deserves “NATO membership with no doubt,” a view that crosses the reddest of Mr. Putin’s red lines.
Russian officials have asserted that the decision to pull out of the grain agreement, which allowed exports from Ukraine through the Black Sea, was about a failure to uphold the side of the deal that benefits Russia — easing sanctions on its own agricultural exports. They also warned that the Russian military would regard any ship bound for Ukraine to be a potential carrier of military cargo.
But another consequence of the decision has been to create another twist in the complex relationship between Mr. Erdogan and Mr. Putin, who analysts say have come to rely on each other over the course of the war.
The two have long had close ties, despite conflicts in Syria, Libya and elsewhere. After the invasion of Ukraine, Turkey preserved its economic and diplomatic links with Russia, positioning itself as a primary negotiator between Moscow, Kyiv and the West.
The Turkish president has often described Mr. Putin as “my friend,” and insisted that he can still make diplomacy with Russia work. “I believe my friend Putin would like this humanitarian bridge to continue,” Mr. Erdogan said this week, after Russia quit the grain deal.
And although he was just about to leave for a three-day Persian Gulf trip, Mr. Erdogan promised that Turkey would continue diplomatic efforts to coax Mr. Putin to return to the deal. The Turkish foreign minister talked with his Russian counterpart on the phone, and Mr. Erdogan himself is expected to meet Mr. Putin in Turkey next month, with the deal almost certain to be discussed in person.
How has Mr. Erdogan frustrated Russia?
After months of stalling and making demands of allies, Mr. Erdogan this month agreed to Sweden’s bid to join NATO, and in March he dropped his objection to Finland’s entry into theweek finally announced that Turkey would support Ukraine’s bid for NATO membership. This move directly challenges Russia’s interests and goes
Black Sea ports for trade. How might the increased military presence of NATO forces in Eastern Europe affect the economic stability of Black Sea ports?
Black Sea ports, was a response to the increased military presence of NATO forces in Eastern Europe. However, experts believe that the move is also aimed at putting pressure on Turkey and highlighting the limitations of its relationship with Russia.
The termination of the grain deal is expected to have significant implications for Ukraine and other countries that rely on its
It is concerning to see Russia’s ongoing attacks on Ukraine’s grain facilities. This not only poses a significant threat to Ukraine’s food security but also jeopardizes the global food supply. Urgent international action must be taken to safeguard these critical grain facilities and ensure food stability on a global scale.
The relentless attacks on Ukraine’s grain facilities by Russia are not only destructive for the country but have far-reaching consequences for the global food supply. These acts of aggression must be condemned and resolved swiftly before they further jeopardize the stability and availability of essential grain resources worldwide.